M. Weber: the concept of social action and its types

3.2 Special types social action according to M. Weber

In addition to the six types of social action according to their orientation, Weber identified four more special types: goal-oriented, value-rational, affective and traditional Patrushev A.I. The disenchanted world of M. Weber. p.- 103. “Social action, like any action, can be defined:

1) purposefully, that is, through the expectation of a certain behavior of objects in the external world and other people using this expectation as a “condition”

Or as “means” for rationally directed and regulated goals (the criterion of rationality is success);

2) value-rationally, that is, through conscious faith in the ethical, aesthetic, religious or otherwise understood unconditional intrinsic value (self-worth) of a certain behavior, taken simply as such and regardless of success;

3) affectively, especially emotionally - through actual affects and feelings;

4) traditionally, that is, through habit.

One cannot help but immediately notice that even two the latter type actions - affective and traditional - are not social actions in the strict sense of the word, because here we are not dealing with the conscious meaning underlying the action. Weber himself notes that “strictly traditional behavior, as well as purely reactive imitation, stands entirely on the border, and often on the other side of what can generally be called action oriented “by meaning,” for this is very often only a dulled a reaction to habitual irritations, proceeding according to the once accepted habitual attitude. Only value-rational and goal-rational actions are the essence of social action, in the Weberian meaning of the word.

“Purely value-rationally,” writes Weber, “acts one who, regardless of foreseeable consequences, acts in accordance with his convictions and fulfills what, as it seems to him, duty, dignity, beauty, religious precept, requires of him, reverence or importance of some... “deed”. A value-rational action... is always an action in accordance with the commandments or demands that the actor considers to be imposed on himself. In the case of a value-rational action, the goal of the action and the action itself coincide, they are not divided, just as in the case of an affective action; side effects in both the first and second are not taken into account.

In contrast to value-rational action, the last, fourth type - goal-oriented action - can be divided in all respects. “Purposeful,” writes Weber, “acts one who orients his action in accordance with the goal, means and side consequences and at the same time rationally weighs both the means in relation to the goal, both the goals in relation to side effects, and, finally, the various possible goals in relation to each other.”

The four indicated types of action are arranged by Weber in order of increasing rationality: if traditional and affective actions can be called subjective-irrational (objectively they can turn out to be rational), then value-rational action already contains a subjective-rational element, since the actor consciously correlates his actions with a certain value as a goal; however, this type of action is only relatively rational, since, first of all, the value itself is accepted without further mediation and justification and (as a result) the secondary consequences of the action are not taken into account. The actual behavior of an individual, says Weber, is oriented, as a rule, in accordance with two or more types of action: it contains goal-rational, value-rational, affective, and traditional aspects. True, in different types of societies certain types of action may be predominant: in societies that Weber called “traditional”, traditional and affective types of action orientation predominate; of course, two more rational types of action are not excluded. On the contrary, in an industrial society highest value acquires a goal-rational effect, but all other types of orientation are present to a greater or lesser extent here. Gaidenko P.P., Davydov Yu.N. History and rationality (Sociology of Max Weber and the Weberian Renaissance). M.: Politizdat, 1991. p. 74.

Finally, Weber notes that the four ideal types do not exhaust the entire variety of types of orientation of human behavior, but since they can be considered the most characteristic, then for the practical work of a sociologist they represent a fairly reliable tool Patrushev A.I. The disenchanted world of M. Weber. With. 105.

The typology of increasing rationality of social action expressed, according to Weber, an objective tendency of the historical process, which, despite many deviations, was of a worldwide nature. The increasing weight of purposeful rational action, displacing the main types, leads to the rationalization of the economy, management, the very way of thinking and the way of life of a person. Universal rationalization is accompanied by an increasing role of science, which, being the purest manifestation of rationality, becomes the basis of economics and management. Society will gradually transform from traditional to modern, based on formal rationalism.

In Weber's teaching, rationality is divided into formal and material, the difference between which is very significant.

“The formal rationality of an economy should indicate the measure of the calculation that is technically possible for it and the calculation that it actually applies.” On the contrary, material rationality is characterized by the degree to which any provision of material goods benefits certain group people takes or can take the form of economically oriented social action from the point of view of certain value postulates.”

Material rationality is associated with a value-rational type of action, while formal rationality is associated with a goal-rational type, which turns it into rationality in itself.

Possibilities of applying Hans Joas's theory to the analysis of modern social life

To make a final conclusion whether there is a place for creativity in Max Weber’s theory of social action, it is necessary to consider in detail this theory and draw a conclusion about whether there can be creativity in such social action...

Possibilities of applying Hans Joas's theory to the analysis of modern social life

Now we need to consider the theory of the normative-orientative model of action that Emile Durkheim proposes in order to also conclude whether creativity has a place in Emile Durkheim’s theory of social action...

M. Weber

Sociological views of Spencer, Durkheim, Weber

Purposeful rational action is not a certain universal type of action; on the contrary, it is not even, according to Weber, predominant in empirical reality. Purposeful rational action is an ideal type, not an empirical generalization...

Sociological theories of M. Weber

The concept of social action forms the core of M. Weber's work. He develops a fundamentally different approach to the study of social processes, which consists in understanding the “mechanics” of human behavior...

Sociological creativity of M. Weber

According to Weber, sociology should consider the behavior of an individual or group of individuals as the starting point of its research. An individual and his behavior are, as it were, a “cell” of sociology, its “atom”...

Structure of social interactions

The problem of social action was introduced by Max Weber. He gave the following definition: “Social is an action that, in accordance with its subjective meaning, includes in the actor an attitude towards that...

theory social action social M. Weber (1864--1920) - the largest German specialist in the field political economy, law, sociology, philosophy. M. Weber was influenced by a number of thinkers who largely determined his worldview...

Theories of social action in social work

Talcott Parsons (1902 - 1979) is a famous American sociologist who founded structural functionalism and social systems theory. T. Parsons's study of social systems is based on the general theory of social action...

Theories of social action in social work

Alexey Nikolaevich Leontiev (1903--1979) - one of the influential scientists domestic psychology, founder and dean of the Faculty of Psychology of Moscow State University. M.V. Lomonosov. When developing the theory of activity A.N. Leontyev relied on the ideas of L.S. Vygotsky and M.Ya...

Theories of social action in social work

M. Weber (1864-1920) - the largest German specialist in the field of political economy, law, sociology, and philosophy. M. Weber was influenced by a number of thinkers who largely determined his worldview. Among them are G. Rickert, K. Marx, I. Kant, N...

Theory of action in sociology

“Action” we call a person’s action (regardless of whether it is external or internal character, comes down to non-interference or patient acceptance)...

Theory of action in sociology

The obligatory components of the action structure are the subject and object of the action. The subject is the bearer of purposeful activity, the one who acts with consciousness and will. The object is what the action is directed towards...

M. Weber's theory of social action and its methodological significance for the subsequent development of sociology

M. Weber connects the subject of sociology with the understanding of social action: “Sociology,” he writes, “is a science that seeks, through interpretation, to understand social action and thereby causally explain its process and impact”...

Concept "social action" first introduced M. Weber. It was this researcher who defined the new sociological term and formulated its main features. Weber understood by this term the actions of a person, which, according to the assumption of the actor, are meaningfully correlated with the actions of other people or oriented towards them. Thus, the most important features of social action according to Weber are the following:

1) the subjective meaning of social action, i.e. personal understanding possible options behavior;

2) a major role in an individual’s action is played by a conscious orientation towards the response of others and the expectation of this reaction.

Weber identified four types of social action. This typology was made by analogy with his doctrine of ideal types:

1) purposeful action– the behavior of an individual is formed exclusively at the level of the mind;

2) value-rational– the behavior of an individual is determined by faith, the acceptance of a certain value system;

3) affective– an individual’s behavior is determined by feelings and emotions;

4) traditional actions– behavior is based on a habit, a pattern of behavior.

Significant contributions to the theory of social action were made by T. Parsons . In Parsons' concept, social action is considered in two manifestations: as a single phenomenon and as a system. He identified the following characteristics:

1) normativity – dependence on generally accepted values ​​and norms;

2) voluntarism – dependence on the will of the subject;

3) the presence of sign regulation mechanisms.

Social action, according to Parsons, performs certain functions in a person’s life that ensure his existence as a biosocial being. Among these functions, four can be distinguished depending on the subsystems of the individual’s life in which they are carried out:

1) on biological level the adaptive function of social action is performed;

2) in the subsystem of assimilation of values ​​and norms, social action performs a personal function;

3) a set of social roles and statuses is provided by the social function;

4) at the level of assimilation of goals and ideals, the cultural function is carried out.

Thus, social action can be characterized as any behavior of an individual or group that has significance for other individuals and groups in the social community or society as a whole. Moreover, the action expresses the nature and content of relations between people and social groups, which, being constant carriers of qualitatively different types of activity, differ in social positions (statuses) and roles.

An important part of the sociological theory of social action is the creation theoretical model behavior. One of the main elements of this model is the structure of social action. This structure includes:

1) actor (subject) – a bearer of active action, possessing will;

2) object – the goal towards which the action is directed;

3) the need for active behavior, which can be considered as a special state of the subject, generated by the need for a means of subsistence, objects necessary for his life and development, and thus acting as a source of activity of the subject;

4) method of action - a set of means that is used by an individual to achieve a goal;

5) result - a new state of the elements formed during the action, a synthesis of the goal, properties of the object and the efforts of the subject.

Any social action has its own mechanism of implementation. It is never instantaneous. To trigger the mechanism of social action, a person must have a certain need for this behavior, which is called motivation. The main factors of activity are interest And orientation.

Interest– this is the attitude of the subject to the necessary means and conditions for satisfying his inherent needs. Orientation is a way of distinguishing social phenomena according to the degree of their significance for the subject. In the sociological literature there are different approaches to the analysis of motivation for social action. So, within one of them, all motives are divided into three large groups:

1) socio-economic. This group includes, first of all, material motives that are associated with the achievement of certain material and social benefits (recognition, honor, respect);

2) implementation of prescribed and learned norms. This group includes motives that have social significance;

3) life cycle optimization. This group includes motives associated with and conditioned by a specific life situation.

After the subject’s motivation arises, the stage of goal formation begins. At this stage, the central mechanism is rational choice.

Rational choice is an analysis of several goals in terms of their availability and suitability and their gradation in accordance with the data of this analysis. The emergence of a goal can occur in two different ways: on the one hand, the goal can be formed as a kind of life plan that is potential in nature; on the other hand, the goal can be formulated as an imperative, i.e., have the character of obligation and obligation.

The goal connects the subject with the objects of the external world and acts as a program for their mutual change. Through a system of needs and interests, situational conditions, the external world takes possession of the subject, and this is reflected in the content of goals. But through a system of values ​​and motives, in a selective attitude towards the world, in the means of achieving goals, the subject strives to establish himself in the world and change it, that is, to master the world himself.

Social actions act as links in a chain of interactions.

| |

The concept of social action forms the core of M. Weber's work. He develops a fundamentally different approach to the study of social processes, which consists in understanding the “mechanics” of human behavior. In this regard, he justifies the concept of social action.

According to M. Weber, social action (inaction, neutrality) is an action that has a subjective “meaning” regardless of the degree of its expression. Social action is the behavior of a person, which, according to the subjectively assumed meaning (goal, intention, idea of ​​something) of the actor, is correlated with the behavior of other people and, based on this meaning, can be clearly explained. In other words, social is such an action “which, in accordance with its subjective meaning, includes in the actor attitudes towards how others will act and is oriented in their direction.” This means that social action presupposes the subject’s conscious orientation towards the partner’s response and the “expectation” of a certain behavior, although it may not follow.

In everyday life, every person, performing a certain action, expects a response from those with whom this action is associated.

Thus, social action has two characteristics: 1) the presence of a subjective meaning of the actor and 2) orientation towards the response of another (others). The absence of any of them means the action is non-social. M. Weber writes: “If on the street many people simultaneously open their umbrellas when it starts to rain, then (as a rule) the action of one is oriented towards the action of another, and the action of everyone is equally caused by the need for protection from rain.” Another example of a non-social action given by M. Weber is this: an accidental collision between two cyclists. Such an action would be social if one of them intended to ram the other, assuming a response from the other cyclist. In the first example the second feature is missing, in the second example both features are missing.

In accordance with these characteristics, M. Weber identifies types of social actions.

Traditional social action. Based on long-term habit of people, custom, tradition.

Affective social action. Based on emotions and not always realized.

Value-rational action. Based on faith in ideals, values, loyalty to “commandments”, duty, etc. M. Weber writes: “A purely value-rational act is the one who, regardless of foreseeable consequences, acts in accordance with his convictions and does what, as it seems to him, duty, dignity, beauty, religious precepts, piety require of him.” or the importance of any “deed” - a value-rational action... is always an action in accordance with the “commandments” or “requirements” that the acting subject considers to be made of himself.” Thus, this type of social action is associated with morality, religion, and law.

Purposeful action. Based on the pursuit of a goal, the choice of means, and taking into account the results of activities. M. Weber characterizes him as follows: “He acts purposefully who orients actions in accordance with the goal, means and side desires and at the same time rationally weighs both the means in relation to the goal, both the goal in relation to side desires, and, finally, different possible goals in relation to each other.” This type action is not associated with any specific field of activity and is therefore considered by M. Weber to be the most developed. Understanding in its pure form takes place where we have goal-oriented, rational action.

The presented understanding of social action has advantages and disadvantages. The advantages include the disclosure of the mechanism human activity, definition driving forces human behavior (ideals, goals, values, desires, needs, etc.). The disadvantages are no less significant:

1) The concept of social action does not take into account random, but sometimes very significant phenomena. They are either of natural origin (natural disasters) or social (economic crises, wars, revolutions, etc.). Random for a given society, for a given subject, they do not carry any subjective meaning and, especially, the expectation of a response. However, history would have a very mystical character if accidents did not play any role in it.

2) The concept of social action explains only the direct actions of people, leaving the consequences of the second, third and other generations out of sight of the sociologist. After all, they do not contain the subjective meaning of the character and there is no expectation of a response. M. Weber underestimates the objective significance of the subjective meaning of people's behavior. Science can hardly afford such a luxury. In studying only the immediate, M. Weber involuntarily comes close to the positivism of Comte, who also insisted on the study of directly sensory-perceived phenomena.

3 Rationalization public life

Weber's main idea is the idea of ​​economic rationality, which has found consistent expression in his contemporary capitalist society with its rational religion (Protestantism), rational law and management (rational bureaucracy), rational monetary circulation, etc. The focus of Weber's analysis is the relationship between religious beliefs and the status and structure of groups in society. Sociological development the idea of ​​rationality received in his concept of rational bureaucracy as the highest embodiment of capitalist rationality. The peculiarities of Weber's method are the combination of sociological, constructive thinking with specific historical reality, which allows us to define his sociology as “empirical”.

It was not by chance that M. Weber arranged the four types of social actions he described in order of increasing rationality, although the first two types do not fully correspond to the criteria of social action. This order, in his opinion, expresses the tendency of the historical process. History proceeds with some “interference” and “deviations”, but still rationalization is a world-historical process. It is expressed, first of all, in the replacement of internal adherence to familiar mores and customs with a systematic adaptation to considerations of interest.

Rationalization covered all spheres of public life: economics, management, politics, law, science, life and leisure of people. All this is accompanied by a colossal strengthening of the role of science, which is a pure type of rationality. Rationalization is the result of a combination of a number of historical factors that predetermined the development of Europe over the past 300-400 years. IN certain period In a certain territory, several phenomena intersected that carried a rational principle:

ancient science, especially mathematics, subsequently associated with technology;

Roman law, which was unknown to previous types of society and which was developed in the Middle Ages;

a method of farming permeated with the “spirit of capitalism”, that is, arising due to the separation of labor power from the means of production and giving rise to “abstract” labor accessible to quantitative measurement.

Weber considered personality as the basis sociological analysis. He believed that complex concepts such as capitalism, religion and the state could only be understood through an analysis of individual behavior. By obtaining reliable knowledge about individual behavior in a social context, the researcher can better understand the social behavior of various human communities. While studying religion, Weber identified the relationship between social organization and religious values. According to Weber, religious values ​​can be a powerful force influencing social change. Thus, in The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, Weber described how faith motivated Calvinists to a life of work and frugality; both of these qualities contributed to the development of modern capitalism (capitalism, according to Weber, is the most rational type management). In political sociology, Weber paid attention to the conflict of interests of various groups ruling class; main conflict political life modern state, according to Weber, - in the struggle between political parties and the bureaucratic apparatus.

This is how M. Weber explains why, despite a number of similarities between the West and the East, fundamentally different societies have developed. He calls all societies outside Western Europe traditional, since they lack the most important feature: a formal rational principle.

Looking from the 18th century, a formally rational society would be considered the embodiment social progress. It embodied much of what the thinkers of the Age of Enlightenment dreamed of. Indeed, in the shortest historical time, just two centuries, the life of society has been transformed beyond recognition. The way of life and leisure time of people has changed, people’s feelings, thoughts, and assessments of everything around them have changed. The positive significance of the triumphant march of rationality across the planet is obvious.

But in the 20th century, the shortcomings of rationality also became noticeable. If in the past money was a means of obtaining the education necessary for personal development and good work, then in the present education becomes a means of earning money. Making money becomes one of the sports, from now on it is a means for another goal - prestige. Thus, the development of personality fades into the background, and something external comes to the fore - prestige. Education has turned into a decorative attribute.

In other areas of public life, rationalization also began to show its disadvantages. Why walk when you have a car? Why sing “for yourself” when you have a tape recorder? The goals here are not contemplation of the surroundings, but movement in space, not self-expression of the soul, but the consciousness that my tape recorder and the music heard from it are “at the level”, and at the decibel level. Formal rationalization impoverishes human existence, although it advances it far ahead in terms of expediency. And what is expedient is profit, abundance, and comfort. Other inappropriate aspects of life are considered indicators of backwardness.

The matter of rationality is reason, not reason. Moreover, reason in rationality often contradicts reason and is poorly combined with humanism. The nature of rationality lies not only in rationality, but also in what is poorly consistent with the meaning of human life. The common meaning of life for all people is satisfaction with their existence, which they call happiness. Life satisfaction does not depend on the content of the activity and even on its social assessment; satisfaction is the limit human activity. Rationalization eliminates this limit; it offers a person more and more new desires. One satisfied desire gives rise to another and so on ad infinitum. How more money there are, the more of them you want to have. F. Bacon's motto “Knowledge is power” is replaced by the motto “Time is money.” The more power you have, the more you want to have it and demonstrate it in every possible way (“Absolute power absolutely corrupts”). Satiated people languish in search of “thrill” sensations. Some pay for intimidation, others for physical torture, others seek oblivion in Eastern religions, etc.

People also realized the danger of rationalizing life in the 20th century. Two world wars and dozens of local wars, the threat of an ecological crisis on a planetary scale have given rise to a movement of anti-scientism, whose supporters blame science for giving people sophisticated means of extermination. The study of “backward” peoples, especially those at the stage of development of the Stone Age, has gained great popularity. Tourism is developing, providing an opportunity to get acquainted with the culture of “traditional” societies.

From the very beginning, positivism acquired a dominant position in sociology. However, as it develops, M. Weber proceeds from the fact that sociology must understand the meanings that people attach to their actions. For this purpose, the term “verstehen” is introduced, which is literally translated from German as “to understand.”

At the same time, sociology, being a science that studies human behavior in the most general form, cannot devote itself to identifying the motives of each individual individual: all these motives are so different and so different from each other that we will not be able to compose how many of them some coherent description or create some typology. However, according to M. Weber, there is no need for this: all people have a common human nature, and we simply need to create a typology of the various actions of people in their relations with their social environment.

The essence of using "verstehen" is to put yourself in the position of other people in order to see exactly what meaning they attach to their actions or what goals they believe they serve. Exploring the meaning of human actions is, to some extent, simply an extension of our everyday attempts to understand the actions of the many different people around us.

2. The concept of “ideal type”

As one of the important research tools in its social analysis M. Weber uses the concept of an ideal type. An ideal type is a certain mental construct that is not extracted from empirical reality, but is created in the researcher’s head as a theoretical scheme of the phenomenon being studied and acts as a kind of “standard.” M. Weber emphasizes that the ideal type itself cannot provide knowledge about the relevant processes and connections of the social phenomenon being studied, but is a purely methodological tool.

M. Weber assumed that sociologists select as characteristics of the ideal type certain aspects of behavior or institutions that are observable in the real world, and exaggerate them into forms of logically understandable intellectual construction. Not all characteristics of this design can be represented in the real world. But any specific situation can be understood more deeply by comparing it with the ideal type. For example, specific bureaucratic organizations may not exactly match the elements of the ideal type of bureaucracy, but knowledge of this ideal type can shed light on these actual variations. Therefore, ideal types are rather hypothetical constructs, formed from real phenomena and having explanatory value.

M. Weber, on the one hand, assumed that the identified discrepancies between reality and the ideal type should lead to a redefinition of the type, and on the other hand, he also argued that ideal types are models that are not subject to verification.

3. The concept of social action

One of central concepts Weberian sociology advocates social action. Here is how M. Weber himself defines it: “We call an action a human action (regardless of whether it is external or internal in nature, whether it comes down to non-interference or patient acceptance), if and because the acting individual or individuals associate a subjective meaning with it. We call social an action that, according to the meaning assumed by the actor or actors, correlates with the action of other people and is oriented toward it.”

Thus, firstly, the most important feature of social action is subjective meaning - personal understanding of possible behavior options. Secondly, the subject’s conscious orientation towards the response of others and the expectation of this reaction is important. Social action differs from purely reflexive activity (rubbing tired eyes) and from those operations into which the action is divided (prepare workplace, get a book, etc.).

4. Ideal types of social action

Purposeful action. This maximally rational type of action is characterized by clarity and awareness of the set goal, and this is correlated with rationally meaningful means that ensure the achievement of this particular goal and not some other goal. The rationality of a goal can be verified in two ways: firstly, from the point of view of its own content, and secondly, from the point of view of expediency. As a social action (and therefore focused on certain expectations from other people), it presupposes a rational calculation of the acting subject for the appropriate reaction from the people around him and for the use of their behavior to achieve the goal. Such a model acts primarily as an ideal type, which means that real human actions can be understood by measuring the degree of deviation from this model.

Value-rational action. This ideal type of social action involves the commission of actions that are based on the conviction of the self-sufficient value of the action. Value-rational action, according to M. Weber, is always subject to certain requirements, in following which the individual sees his duty. If he acts in accordance with these requirements - even if rational calculation predicts a high probability of unfavorable consequences of such an act for him personally, then we are dealing with a value-rational action. Classic example value-rational action: the captain of a sinking ship is the last to leave, although this threatens his life. The awareness of such direction of actions, their correlation with certain ideas about values ​​- about duty, dignity, beauty, morality, etc. - already speaks of a certain rationality and meaningfulness.

Traditional action. This type of action is formed on the basis of following tradition, that is, imitation of certain patterns of behavior that have developed in culture and are approved by it, and therefore are practically not subject to rational comprehension and criticism. Such an action is performed in many respects purely automatically according to established stereotypes; it is characterized by the desire to focus on habitual patterns of behavior that have developed on the basis own experience and the experience of previous generations. Despite the fact that traditional actions do not at all imply the development of an orientation towards new opportunities, it is this that constitutes the lion's share of all actions performed by individuals. To some extent, people’s commitment to performing traditional actions (manifested in a huge number of options) serves as the basis for the stability of the existence of society and the predictability of the behavior of its members.

Affective action is the least meaningful of the ideal types listed in the table. Its main characteristic is a certain emotional condition: an outburst of passion, hatred, anger, horror, etc. Affective action has its “meaning” mainly in the speedy removal of the emotional tension that has arisen, in discharge. An individual acts under the influence of affect if he seeks to immediately satisfy his need for revenge, pleasure, devotion, blissful contemplation, or to relieve the tension of any other affects, no matter how base or refined they may be.

The above typology can serve as a good illustration for understanding the essence of what was defined above as the “ideal type.”

5. The concept of rationalization of social life

M. Weber is firmly convinced that rationalization is one of the main trends in the historical process. Rationalization finds its expression in increasing the share of goal-oriented actions in the total volume of all possible types of social actions and in increasing their significance from the point of view of the structure of society as a whole. This means that the way of farming is rationalized, management and way of thinking are rationalized. And all this, according to M. Weber, is accompanied by a colossal strengthening of the social role of scientific knowledge - this most “pure” embodiment of the principle of rationality.

Formal rationality in Weber’s understanding is, first of all, the calculability of everything that can be quantified and calculated. The type of society in which this kind of dominant arises is called industrial by modern sociologists (although C. Saint-Simon was the first to call it that, and then this term was quite actively used by O. Comte). M. Weber (and after him most modern sociologists) calls all previously existing types of societies traditional. The most important sign traditional societies- this is the absence of a formal-rational principle in the social actions of the majority of their members and the predominance of actions that are closest in nature to the traditional type of action.

Formal-rational is a definition applicable to any phenomenon, process, action, which is not only amenable to quantitative accounting and calculation, but, moreover, is largely exhausted by its quantitative characteristics. The movement of the process itself historical development is characterized by a tendency towards an increase in formal-rational principles in the life of society and an increasing predominance of the goal-oriented type of social action over all others. This should also mean increasing the role of intelligence in common system motivations and decision-making of social actors.

A society where formal rationality dominates is a society where rational (i.e., rationally prudent) behavior acts as the norm. All members of such a society behave in such a way as to use material resources, technology, and money rationally and for the benefit of all. Luxury, for example, cannot be considered rational, since it is by no means a wise use of resources.

Rationalization as a process, as a historical trend, according to M. Weber, includes:

1) in the economic sphere - the organization of factory production by bureaucratic means and the calculation of benefits using systematic evaluation procedures;

2) in religion - the development of theological concepts by intellectuals, the gradual disappearance of the magical and the displacement of sacraments by personal responsibility;

3) in law - the erosion of specially designed lawmaking and arbitrary judicial precedent by deductive legal reasoning based on universal laws;

4) in politics - the decline of traditional norms of legitimation and the replacement of charismatic leadership by a regular party machine;

5) in moral behavior - greater emphasis on discipline and education;

6) in science – a consistent reduction in the role of the individual innovator and the development of research teams, coordinated experiments and state-directed scientific policy;

7) in society as a whole - the spread of bureaucratic management methods, state control and administration.

Rationalization is the process by which the sphere of human relations becomes the subject of calculation and management in all social spheres: politics, religion, economic organization, university administration, in the laboratory.

6. Sociology of domination by M. Weber and its types

It should immediately be noted that M. Weber distinguishes between power and domination. The first, he believes, precedes the second and does not always have its characteristics. Strictly speaking, domination is rather a process of exercising power. In addition, dominance means a certain probability that orders given by some people (who have authority) will be met by other people with a willingness to obey and carry them out.

These relationships, according to M. Weber, are based on mutual expectations: on the part of the manager (the one who gives orders) - the expectation that the order given will certainly be executed; on the part of the managed - the expectation that the manager has the right to give such orders. Only with confidence in such a right does the controlled person receive motivation to carry out the order. In other words, legitimate, i.e. legal, domination cannot be limited to the very fact of using power; it requires faith in its legitimacy. Power becomes dominance when it is regarded by people as legitimate. At the same time, M. Weber argues, “... the legitimacy of the order can only be guaranteed internally, namely:

1) purely affective: emotional devotion;

2) value-rational: belief in the absolute significance of order as an expression of the highest immutable values ​​(moral, aesthetic or any other);

3) religiously: faith in the dependence of good and salvation on the preservation of a given order.”

There are three ideological bases of legitimacy that can invest rulers with power: traditional, charismatic and legal-rational. In accordance with this, M. Weber substantiates three ideal types of domination, each of which is named according to its ideological basis. Let's look at each of these types in more detail.

Legal-rational domination. Here the main motive for submission is the satisfaction of one’s own interests. At the same time, people obey generally accepted laws, rules that are expressed by other people and on whose behalf they act. Legal-rational domination implies obedience to formal rules established through “correct” public procedures. Hence the important role that bureaucracy plays in legal-rational domination as an integral element of a rational society, and the enormous attention that M. Weber pays to it in his studies.

Traditional dominance. It rests on the habitual, most often not fully conscious, belief in the sanctity and inviolability of generally accepted traditions and in the legitimacy of the prerogatives of power granted by them. An adherent of traditional authority accepts rules that embody custom and ancient practice. Within this type of domination, the right of power is most often hereditary in nature (something like this: “I serve this man because my father served his father, and my grandfather served his grandfather”). In its purest form, this is patriarchal power. The concept of "patriarchy" in sociology is usually used to describe the dominance of men over women, and it can manifest itself in various types society This concept is also used to describe certain type household organization in which the oldest man dominates the entire family, including younger men. One of the most common types of traditional domination, according to M. Weber, is patrimonialism. In patrimonial systems, administrative and political force are under the direct personal control of the ruler. Moreover, the support of patrimonial power is provided not so much by those forces that are recruited from the landowning aristocracy (which is typical, for example, of feudalism), but rather with the help of slaves, regular troops or mercenaries. M. Weber, considering patrimonialism, identified the following features:

1) political instability, since he is the object of intrigue and palace coups;

2) an obstacle to the development of rational capitalism.

In other words, patrimonialism appeared as one aspect of Weber's explanation for the lack of capitalist development in various Eastern societies dominated by personal rule.

Charismatic dominance. It is based on the exceptional qualities attributed to the leader. The term charisma itself (from the Greek “charisma” - “divine gift, grace”) was introduced into the sociological conceptual apparatus by the German theologian E. Troeltsch. In this type of dominance, orders are carried out because the followers or disciples are convinced of the very special character of their leader, whose power exceeds the usual existing practice.

Charismatic dominance is based on the extraordinary, perhaps even magical ability that the master possesses. Neither origin, nor heredity associated with it, nor any rational considerations play a role here - only the personal qualities of the leader are important. Having charisma means direct, directly exercised dominance. Most of the prophets famous in history (including all the founders of world religions), generals and outstanding political leaders were charismatics.

As a rule, with the death of a leader, disciples dismantle charismatic beliefs or transform them into traditional (“official charisma”) or legal-rational forms. Therefore, charismatic power itself is unstable and temporary.

7. The concept of bureaucracy in the theory of M. Weber

The concept of “bureaucracy” has two meanings:

1) a certain method of management;

2) a special social group that carries out this management process. M. Weber identified rationality as the main characteristic feature of any bureaucratic organization. Bureaucratic rationality, according to M. Weber, should be considered as the embodiment of capitalism; therefore, a decisive role in a bureaucratic organization must be played by technical specialists who have received special training and use in their work scientific methods. A bureaucratic organization is characterized by a number of important features, among which M. Weber identifies the following:

1) efficiency, achieved mainly through a clear division of responsibilities between employees of the apparatus, which makes it possible to use highly specialized and highly qualified specialists in each position;

2) strict hierarchization of power, which allows a higher official to exercise control over the activities of a lower one;

3) a formally established and clearly recorded system of rules, ensuring uniformity of management activities and the application of general instructions to particular cases, as well as preventing uncertainty and ambiguity in the interpretation of orders; employees of a bureaucratic organization are subject primarily to these rules, and not to the specific person who expresses them;

4) impersonality administrative activities and emotional neutrality of relationships: each functionary acts as a formal bearer of social power at a certain level, a representative of the position he holds.

Other characteristic features of bureaucracy also include the following: administration based on written documents; recruiting personnel based on abilities obtained through special education; long term service; promotion based on seniority or merit; separation of private and official income.

Modern scientific analysis M. Weber's position claims that his idea of ​​​​the rationality of bureaucracy contains two slightly different points. In one sense, the rationality of bureaucracy is that it maximizes technical efficiency. In another sense, bureaucracy is a system of social control or authority that is accepted by members of an organization or social community because they view the rules as rational and fair—a “legal-rational” value system. M. Weber's main goal was a broad historical comparative analysis methods of political administration and their impact on society, he sought to identify the bureaucratic ideal type. Real bureaucratic organizations quite often turn out to be ineffective: they contain, along with rational features, many irrational ones, and along with formal relations, informal ones. Not to mention the fact that obedience here often turns into an end in itself, and power is legitimized by the very fact of being in office.

One of the central points of Weber's theory is the identification of an elementary particle of individual behavior in society - social action, which is the cause and consequence of a system of complex relationships between people. “Social action,” according to Weber, is an ideal type, where “action” is the action of a person who associates a subjective meaning (rationality) with it, and “social” is an action that, according to the meaning assumed by its subject, correlates with the actions of other persons and is oriented on them. The scientist identifies four types of social action:

§ purposeful- using certain expected behavior of other people to achieve goals;

§ value-rational - understanding behavior and action as intrinsically value-based, based on moral norms and religion;

§ affective - especially emotional, sensual;

§ traditional- based on the force of habit, the accepted norm. In a strict sense, affective and traditional actions are not social.

Society itself, according to Weber's teaching, is a collection of acting individuals, each of whom strives to achieve his own goals. Meaningful behavior that results in the achievement of individual goals leads to the person acting as a social being, in association with others, thus ensuring significant progress in interaction with the environment.

Scheme 1. Types of social action according to M. Weber

Weber deliberately arranged the four types of social action he described in order of increasing rationality. This order, on the one hand, serves as a kind of methodological device for explaining the different nature of the subjective motivation of an individual or group, without which it is generally impossible to talk about action oriented toward others; He calls motivation “expectation”; without it, action cannot be considered social. On the other hand, and Weber was convinced of this, the rationalization of social action is at the same time a tendency of the historical process. Although this process is not without difficulties, various kinds obstacles and deviations, European history of recent centuries. the involvement of other, non-European civilizations on the path of industrialization is evidenced, according to Weber. that rationalization is a world-historical process. “One of the essential components of the “rationalization” of action is the replacement of internal adherence to customary mores and customs by systematic adaptation to considerations of interest.”

Rationalization, also according to Weber, is a form of development, or social progress, which is carried out within the framework of a certain picture of the world, which is different in history.

Weber identifies three most general type, three ways of relating to the world, which contain the corresponding attitudes or vectors (directions) of people’s life activity, their social action.

The first of them is associated with Confucianism and Taoist religious and philosophical views, which became widespread in China; the second - with Hindu and Buddhist, common in India; the third - with Judaism and Christianity, which arose in the Middle East and spread to Europe and America. Weber defines the first type as adaptation to the world, the second as an escape from the world, the third as mastery of the world. These different types of attitudes and lifestyles set the direction for subsequent rationalization, that is different ways movement along the path of social progress.

Very important aspect in Weber's work - the study of basic relationships in social associations. First of all, this concerns the analysis of power relations, as well as the nature and structure of organizations where these relations are most clearly manifested.

From the application of the concept of “social action” to political sphere Weber derives three pure types of legitimate (recognized) domination:

§ legal, - in which both the governed and the managers are subject not to some individual, but to the law;

§ traditional- determined primarily by the habits and mores of a given society;

§ charismatic- based on the extraordinary abilities of the leader’s personality.

Sociology, according to Weber, should be based on scientific judgments that are as free as possible from various kinds of personal biases of the scientist, from political, economic, and ideological influences.

10. K. Marx, F. Engels. Materialistic understanding of history.

K. Marx (1818–1883) criticized Feuerbach's anthropological materialism for its abstract approach to understanding man. In his “Theses on Feuerbach,” he emphasized that “the essence of man is not an abstraction inherent in the individual. In its reality it is the totality of all social relations.” Of course, the idea that “man is shaped by circumstances” is not new; Marx’s detailed analysis of these circumstances was new. Of the variety of social relations, Marx singles out material, production relations as the main, defining ones, that is, those relations that develop between people in the process of producing material goods. Marx comes to the conclusion that it is labor and material production that form the basis of human existence and human history.

This is how the most important, central idea of ​​Marxist philosophy is born - materialistic understanding of history. In a condensed form, the essence of the materialist understanding of history is outlined by Marx in his work “Towards a Critique of Political Economy” (1859): “The totality of production relations constitutes the economic structure of society, the real basis on which the legal and political superstructure rises and to which they correspond certain forms public consciousness. The method of production of material life determines the social, political and spiritual processes of life in general. It is not the consciousness of people that determines their existence, but, on the contrary, their social existence determines their consciousness.”

Based on a materialist understanding of history, Marx establishes a certain repeatability in the history of various countries and in the organization of their social life. He identifies several main historical forms organization of society (or formations). The differences between formations are based on differences in the type of organization material production. As a result, the history of mankind is presented in the form of development from the primitive system, through the slave and feudal system to the capitalist one, and from there, necessarily, to the communist social formation.

Here Marx comes to the second most important idea of ​​his philosophy - the understanding of history as a natural, natural historical process. He comes to the conclusion that there are not only objective laws of development of nature, but also of society. Based on this conclusion, Marx and his comrade F. Engels in the “Manifesto of the Communist Party” proclaimed the inevitability of the fall of capitalism and the transition to a communist society.

Marx became interested in the ideas of communism while still a young man. They expressed the dream of a humane and fair social system. In the proletariat, Marx saw a special class whose vocation is the destruction of exploitative society, with its inherent alienation of man. Marx believed that the basis of all human alienation is economic alienation, or alienated labor (that is, forced labor). Neither the source material nor the products of such labor belong to the worker - they are strangers to him. The prospects for human development lie in the destruction of alienated labor, and therefore private property. Marx came to the conclusion that only after the destruction of private property should labor turn into a means of human self-development and become a necessity for him. A comprehensively developed person living in harmony with nature - these are some of the features of the communist ideal drawn by Marx.

It is easy to see that Marxism, like all classical philosophy, was characterized by faith in the power of the human mind, capable of creating a perfect society. The idea of ​​social progress is filled here with a new meaning: each of the formations is considered as a stage of historical progress, the pinnacle of which is communism.

The fate of Marxist philosophy turned out to be unique: the arguments of its supporters are comparable in strength to the arguments of its opponents. As for the idea of ​​a materialist understanding of history, according to Karl Popper, one of Marx’s most implacable critics, it contains common sense and remains relevant today. “Marx taught us,” notes Popper, “that the development of ideas cannot be fully understood unless one takes into account the conditions of their emergence and the economic situation of their creators.” At the same time, Popper believes that Marx's economic determinism (that is, his insistence on economic prerequisites as the final basis for social development) is erroneous. “Experience shows,” he writes, “that under certain circumstances the influence of ideas can outweigh the influence of economic factors. And it is impossible to correctly understand the nature of economic development without taking into account the development of scientific, religious and other ideas.”

But the materialist understanding of history does not at all deny the role of ideas in the life of society. It only requires going further: where do the ideas themselves come from?

11. Peculiarities of the formation and development of Russian sociology. Main schools and directions: L. Mechnikov, N. Mikhailovsky, P. Lavrov, N. Ya. Danilevsky.

In Russia, sociology began to gain its position in the 60s. XIX century, when the scientific community and the reading public were able to get acquainted with the translations of O. Comte’s books and articles. Influenced by various currents Western sociology, domestic sociologists create their own original concepts that reflect the originality Russian society. In the development of sociological thought in pre-revolutionary Russia 5 stages can be distinguished:

Since the early 1860s. before 1890;

Since the 1890s until the beginning of the 20th century:

Since the beginning of the 20th century. until 1917;

Revival 1950-60s;

Since the 1980-1990s.

1 The first stage of the development of sociology (1860s - 1890) is associated primarily with the work of prominent ideologists of populism P.L. Lavrova and N.K. Mikhailovsky. The direction they developed was called the “ethical-subjective school.” These thinkers believed that the objective study of social phenomena should be combined with their subjective assessment based on the principles of ethics and social justice.

In his opinion, the leading force, “the main organ of progress is the individual, characterized by a critical consciousness to change frozen social forms.” According to Lavrov, the historical process has a direction and is measured by the degree of development of social solidarity.

He identifies three types of solidarity:

Habit based;

Based on the similarity of affects and interests;

Conscious solidarity based on the unity of people's beliefs.

From here he concludes that only those groups and peoples can be recognized as historical, among which conscious solidarity has appeared.

N.K. Mikhailovsky held similar views. According to Mikhailovsky, the main task Sociology as a science should consist not so much in the search and discovery of objective laws, but in revealing the human, humanistic content of social progress and correlating it with the needs of the human personality.

He calls the subjective method such a way of satisfying a cognitive need when the sociologist-observer puts himself in the position of the observed. According to him, the individual and society complement each other, since any suppression of the individual harms society, and suppression of the social harms the individual.

Thus, Lavrov and Mikhailovsky considered a “critically thinking person” as the leading force of social progress, who, in their opinion, acted as a creator of history and at the same time as a bearer of a moral ideal. They saw the essence of progress in the growth of social solidarity and individual consciousness.

Along with subjective sociology, positivism played a significant role in the sociological thought of Russia of that period. The positivist approach received its most complete development in scientific creativity MM. Kovalevsky -- famous historian, ethnographer and sociologist. He was one of the first to use the comparative historical method in sociology, with the help of which he studied the genesis of peoples different countries and eras. Kovalevsky called the analysis of social phenomena based on their origin “genetic sociology”, and from this position he considered, in particular, the origin of the family, property, and state.

Based on the principles of “sociological pluralism,” he developed a theory of social progress, which is sometimes called the core of his sociology. Kovalevsky saw the main content of social progress in “expanding the sphere of human solidarity.”

In line with positivism, the “naturalistic” school developed, within which several trends and directions of sociological thought arose. These include the concept of geographical determinism, developed by the prominent geographer and sociologist L.I. Mechnikov. He explained the unevenness of social development by the influence of geographical conditions, mainly water resources and communication routes. Wherein a vital role in the development of society was assigned to the influence of hydrological factors (rivers, seas, oceans). Theory L.I. Mechnikov contained valuable ideas explaining the mechanisms of interaction between nature and society.

The most prominent representatives of the psychological trend in Russian sociology were E.V. De Roberti and N.I. Kareev.

E.V. De Roberti understands sociology as a theoretical generalizing science, the main task of which is “the discovery of the laws governing the emergence, formation and gradual development of the highest superorganic or spiritual form of world energy.

According to De Roberti, there are four groups of social facts that ultimately determine the behavior of individuals in society and the specifics of their psychological interaction: knowledge, religious faith, aesthetic feelings and practical, technical actions of people.

N.I. made a great contribution to substantiating the role of mental factors in the development of society. Kareev. He considered the subject of sociology to be the spiritual interaction of people as a determining factor in social life. Kareev noted that in the activities and behavior of people, and therefore in their entire social life, the intellectual, emotional and volitional sides of their spiritual existence play a large role. In his opinion, a person’s mental life follows from his “mental nature” and is determined by it. Like De Roberti, Kareev attached great importance to “collective psychology,” which underlies the development of spiritual culture.

Simultaneously with the so-called academic sociology in Russia, ideological and political sociology received great development.

Religious social philosophy(Christian humanism) is associated with the names of such Russian thinkers as A. Khomyakov, K. Leontiev, Vl. Soloviev, N. Berdyaev and others. The emergence of this direction was caused primarily by the increase in the late 19th - early 20th centuries. crisis phenomena in all spheres of public life, as well as the growing activity of the masses and the confusion of the intelligentsia.

Vladimir Solovyov and Nikolai Berdyaev were deeply aware that true sociology can only be that which, in its essence, is the ideology of the national spirit. They believed that sociology should develop such important integral concepts that unite society as “national idea”, “social ideal”, “radical interest” and other concepts belonging to the category of the so-called value orientation, both global and national scale.

The sociology of Marxism in Russia was represented by two main theories: orthodox Marxism (G.V. Plekhanov and V.I. Lenin) and the so-called “legal Marxism” (P.B. Struve, M. Tugan-Baranovsky and others).

Legal Marxism is a theoretical and ideological direction of social thought that recognized the truth of the economic teachings of K. Marx about the nature and historical inevitability of capitalism. The most prominent representatives of this trend were P.B. Struve and M. Tugan-Baranovsky.

According to P. Struve, the economic prosperity of Russia in the future will be possible on the basis of the capitalist path of development. He considered a necessary condition for this to be the successful implementation of social reforms and the creation of opportunities for the free development of individuals. Important role Struve assigned the activities of the bourgeois state - the “organization of order”, capable of establishing the economic and political life of society and preventing social conflicts.

M. Tugan-Baranovsky, as well as P.B. Struve, preferred civilized capitalism to socialism. Being a major economist and sociologist, he expressed the following ideas:

Partial and cooperative entrepreneurship;

Connections of large and small production;

Public self-government in public organizations, communities;

Distribution according to work: “from each according to his ability, to each ability according to his work.”

Tugan-Baranovsky attached great importance to free agricultural cooperation, through which peasants could achieve large-scale and efficient production.

The main meaning of Marxist theory lies in revealing the patterns and essence of the transition from private property to public property.

Anarchism (from the Greek anarchia - lack of command, anarchy) is a socio-political movement that denies the need for state and other power and preaches unlimited personal freedom. non-recognition of generally accepted laws and order. The most prominent representatives of anarchism in Russia were the Russian revolutionaries M.A. Bakunin and P.A. Kropotkin.

Anarchism of the 19th century. was divided into two currents:

1 anarchism-individualism, of which Bakunin was a representative,

2 anarchism-collectivism. Kropotkin represented the second movement, developing it into anarchism-communism.

The essence of anarchism, as Bakunin believed, can be expressed in the words: “leave things to their natural course.” Hence one of the central ideas of anarchism is the idea of ​​individual freedom as its natural state, which should not be violated by any state institutions. The state, according to Bakunin, is always the power of the minority, a force opposed to the people.

Like Bakunin, Kropotkin sharply opposed “state socialism,” believing that the working people themselves were able to “develop a system based on their personal and collective freedom.” This free “anarchist communism,” in his opinion, should be a society of equal people, based on self-government and consisting of many unions organized for all kinds of production: agricultural, industrial, mental, artistic, etc.

A prominent representative of the historical school (trend) of Russian sociology was N.Ya. Danilevsky (1822-1885). In his most famous work, “Europe and Russia,” he identified and analyzed the main “cultural-historical types,” or civilizations. According to his theory, every society, every people in its development experiences cyclical stages - birth, youth, decrepitness and death. Danilevsky’s civilizational approach served as a methodological basis for the search for a special historical path for Russia, a justification for its originality and the possibility for it not to repeat the stages of development of Western countries.

Danilevsky’s ideas had a strong influence on P.A. Sorokina, F.M. Dostoevsky, L.N. Tolstoy. Their echoes can be heard in the ideas of L.N. Gumilyov and many other authors.

2 At the second stage (1890s - beginning of the 20th century), the process of institutionalization of Russian sociology begins, which penetrates into the academic environment and increasingly finds support in scientific and public circles.

During this period, new trends in sociology emerged, the most influential of which was the sociological school of law. Representatives of this school are famous jurists and sociologists N.Zh. Korkunov, S.A. Muromtsev, P.I. Novgorodtsev and others - sharply criticized positivism and sought to give a normative, moral and legal justification for social life. The merit of these researchers was that they were able to deeply develop a number of methodological problems of sociological knowledge.

By the end of the second stage, Russian sociology entered the international arena. At the same time, there have been shifts in the process of institutionalization of domestic sociology. Thanks to the efforts of M.M. Kovalevsky in 1908, the first department of sociology in Russia was opened at the private Psychoneurological Institute in St. Petersburg.

3 The third stage (beginning of the 20th century - 1917) of the development of Russian sociology is characterized by an orientation toward neopositivism, the most famous representatives of which were K.M. Takhtarev and P.A. Sorokin.

Among Russian sociologists K.M. Takhtarev was one of the first to draw attention to the need to use empirical methods in sociology - observation, experiment and socio-statistical measurement, since without mathematics sociology cannot become an exact and objective science.

Scientific and organizational activities of P.A. Sorokina contributed to accelerating the process of institutionalization of sociological science. With him active participation The country's first sociological society is created, and a degree in sociology is established. In 1920, the country's first sociological department was opened at Petrograd University, headed by P.A. Sorokin.

Pitirim Sorokin is a major scientist and public figure who has made a huge contribution to the development of domestic and world sociology. P. Sorokin distinguishes between theoretical and practical sociology. Theoretical sociology, in his opinion, only observes, analyzes and builds conceptual models, and practical sociology should be an applied discipline.

The sections of sociological knowledge, according to P. Sorokin, are:

Social analytics, which studies the structure (structure) of a social phenomenon and its main forms;

Social mechanics (or social physiology), which describes the processes of interaction of social aggregates (people, groups, social institutions);

Social genetics, which studies the development of social life, its individual aspects and institutions.

P. Sorokin considered interaction to be the primary unit of sociological analysis. Developing the idea of ​​understanding society as a special social space that does not coincide with the territorial, physical, etc., P. Sorokin created two interrelated concepts: social stratification (social stratification) and social revolution.

According to the first theory, the whole society is divided into different layers - strata, which differ among themselves in terms of income levels, types of activities, political views, cultural orientations, etc. Sorokin considered economic, political, and professional to be the main forms of social stratification. The internal dynamics of stratification systems is expressed in the processes social mobility- movement of people across positions of social space.

P. Sorokin was an opponent of all social upheavals, including revolutions, and advocated a normal, evolutionary path of development. He believed that problems arising in society should be solved on the basis of sound management.

Taking as a classification criterion general philosophical ideas about the dual nature of man, in which the concepts of “material” and “ideal”, “sublime” and “earthly” coexist, P. Sorokin identified three types of cultural supersystems: sensual, ideational and idealistic (or integral).

Thus, sociology in pre-revolutionary Russia developed as part of global sociological thought. Experiencing the influence of various trends in Western sociology, she was at the same time able to put forward many of her own theories and concepts that reflected the unique development of Russian society.

4 Fourth stage. The revival of Russian sociology began only in the late 1950s and early 1960s. in connection with liberalization political regime. In the 1960s sociology is restoring its social status. In 1962, the Soviet Sociological Association was created, in 1968 - the Institute of Concrete social research USSR Academy of Sciences (now the Institute of Sociology). Faculties and departments are opening at the country's universities. Since 1974, the specialized journal “Sociological Research” began to be published.

During this period, large-scale sociological studies were carried out to study the impact of scientific and technological progress on social and professional structure workers, their attitude towards work. Widespread received so-called “social planning”, drawing up a plan for the social and economic development of industrial enterprises, collective and state farms, and even some cities. In the course of these studies, rich factual material was accumulated, methods were developed sociological research, acquired skills in conducting sociological research.

So, in the post-war period there was a partial institutionalization of sociology in the USSR, but it did not receive widespread in society, and the development of this science continued to be hampered by party authorities.

5 Fifth stage. The current stage of rapid development of Russian sociology began in the mid-1980s. At the stage of sociology, it emerges from the tutelage of the CPSU and historical materialism, and becomes an independent science and academic discipline, taught in most universities in Russia since 1989/1990.

The subsequent intensive development of sociology is associated with fundamental changes that have occurred in the life of the country since the mid-1980s. In 1987, the All-Union Center for the Study of Public Opinion (VTsIOM) was created, as well as a number of independent sociological services. Surveys of the population on a variety of issues and the practical use of sociological information have become quite common. Sociology found its rebirth and began to be taught in higher and secondary special education. educational institutions countries as a general educational discipline.

In 1988, a resolution was adopted by the CPSU Central Committee, which for the first time recognized the need for higher sociological education in the country. June 6, 1989 can be considered the birthday of the sociological faculty of Moscow State University, which turned out to be the first sociological faculty of the USSR after a long break. The dean of the faculty was its organizer and head of the sociology department, Professor V. Dobrenkov.

In many large cities, sociological faculties of universities operate successfully. IN last years Dozens of textbooks and teaching aids have been published on general and sectoral sociological disciplines.

The development of sociological science in Russia in the second half of the 20th century is due to a number of features:

The slow formation of the social preconditions of capitalism and the institutions of civil society. The bipolar structure of Russian society (“lower-upper”) with the virtual absence of a middle class stimulated a high degree of violence and a special punitive role of the state in the integration of society. Collective (community) forms of social community determined the underdevelopment of individual consciousness, the priority of public interest over personal interest;

Orthodoxy was the integrating principle;

Noticeable influence of ideology. In the public consciousness of Russian society, extremes prevailed - conservatism and radicalism. The first was associated with Slavophilism, with the search for a special path for the development of Russia. Radicalism insisted on revolutionary methods of transforming society (starting from the Decembrists and ending with Bolshevism).

Conclusion

Thus, the formation of sociology as a science in our country has passed difficult path. At every stage historical transformations sociology opened up paths for new directions that determined its forward movements.

Among the problems facing sociology in modern stage development are: the social position of a person in society and group, social structure, participation in management, “human relations”, public opinion, socio-cultural and interethnic processes, environmental problems and other issues related to the specific historical and socio-economic situation in the transition of the country to market relations.

The origin and development of Russian scientific sociology was due to numerous reasons and factors. By the middle of the 19th century, when Russian sociology, based on the prevailing opinion, began its formation, Western sociological thought had already found its embodiment in the works of O. Comte, Saint-Simon, G. Spencer and other social scientists of that time. Undoubtedly, on the process of the emergence of sociology in Russia known influence provided sociological views Western schools and their representatives.

Sociological thought in Russia is developing as part of global sociological science. Experiencing influence from various trends in Western sociology, she at the same time puts forward original theories that reflect the unique development of Russian society.

Modern Russian sociology is the sociology of liberalism, social order, based on the economic freedom of the individual and the priority of civil society over the state.

12.​ P. Sorokin in the history of Russian and world sociology.

Pitirim Aleksandrovich Sorokin(1889-1968) - one of the most prominent classics of sociology, who had a great influence on its development in the 20th century. Sometimes P. Sorokin is called not a Russian sociologist, but an American one. Indeed, chronologically, the “Russian” period of his activity is strictly limited to 1922 - the year of his expulsion from Russia. However, the formation of Sorokin’s sociological views, as well as his political position, took place precisely in his homeland, in the conditions of wars, revolutions, the struggle of political parties and scientific schools. In the main work of the “Russian” period - the two-volume “System of Sociology” (1920) - he formulates the basic principles of the theory of social stratification and social mobility (he introduced these terms into scientific use), structures theoretical sociology, highlighting social analytics, social mechanics and social genetics.

Sorokin considers social behavior, social interaction of individuals to be the basis of sociological analysis, which he views as a generic model of both a social group and society as a whole. He divides social groups into organized and unorganized, paying special attention to the analysis of the hierarchical structure of an organized social group. Within groups there are strata (layers) distinguished according to economic, political and professional characteristics. Sorokin argued that a society without stratification and inequality is a myth. The shapes and proportions of the layering may change, but its essence is constant. Stratification is an invariable characteristic of any organized society and exists in non-democratic societies and in societies with “thriving democracies”.

Sorokin talks about the presence of two types of social mobility in society - vertical and horizontal. Social mobility means a transition from one social position to another, a kind of “elevator” for movement both within a social group and between groups. Social stratification and mobility in society are predetermined by the fact that people are not equal in their physical strength, mental abilities, inclinations, tastes, etc.; in addition, by the very fact of their joint activities. Joint activity necessarily requires organization, and organization is unthinkable without managers and subordinates. Since society is always stratified, it is characterized by inequality, but this inequality must be reasonable.

Society must strive for a state in which a person can develop his abilities, and science and the intuition of the masses, and not revolutions, can help society in this. In his work “The Sociology of Revolution” (1925), Sorokin calls the revolution a “great tragedy” and defines it as “a death machine that deliberately destroys on both sides the healthiest and most able-bodied, the most outstanding, gifted, strong-willed and mentally qualified elements of the population.” Revolution is accompanied by violence and cruelty, a reduction in freedom, and not its increase. She deforms social structure society, worsens the economic and cultural position of the working class. The only way to improve and reconstruct social life can only be reforms carried out by legal and constitutional means. Every reform must be preceded by scientific research into specific social conditions, and every reform must first be “tested” on a small social scale.

Sorokin’s theoretical legacy and his contribution to the development of domestic and world sociology can hardly be overestimated, he is so rich in deeply meaningful, theoretically and methodologically supported knowledge of social reality and trends in the future development of society.

Sociology P. Sorokin

Pitirim Sorokin(1889-1968) created sociological theory, which was called “integral”. In it, society was viewed as a sociocultural system. He distinguished four sections in sociology: the doctrine of society, social mechanics (determination of the statistical laws of society), social genetics (the origin and development of society), social policy (private sociological science).

An element of society is the interaction of individuals. It is divided into patterned and non-patterned, one-sided and two-sided, antagonistic and non-antagonistic. Society is the process and result of social interaction (the interaction of many individuals). Its result is their adaptation to their environment. In the process of such adaptation, a social order of society arises, the main development trend of which is social equality.

The development of human society occurs through evolution and revolution. Social evolution represents a gradual and progressive development based on knowledge of society, reforms, cooperation of people, and the desire for social equality. Social revolution - rapid, deep progressive or regressive development of society, based on the violence of one class over another. It changes the nature of social equality.

Based on the experience of personal participation in two Russian revolutions 1917, P. Sorokin identifies their main reasons: suppression of the basic needs of the majority of the population by the existing social order, the ineffectiveness of this social system, the weakness of the forces of public order. Social revolution goes through stages revolutionary explosion when basic needs find their way out and destroy the country, and counter-revolution when these needs are curbed.

Pitirim Sorokin developed a theory social stratification, division of society into many social layers (strata) depending on wealth, power, education, etc.

He also has priority in the discovery of the theory of social mobility, movement from one social layer to another.